Democrats Balk at Tax Cut Vote, Liberals Appalled

Congressional Democrats were hoping to push forward with the Obama
administration's plan to extend Bush-era tax cuts on those making under $250,000 a
year, but the proposal has reportedly been shelved
until at least after elections. The internal debate raging
among Democrats is summed up by one congressional aide who was quoted by
Talking Points Memo saying,
"We have a winning message now, why muddy it up with a failed vote,
because, of course, Republicans are going to block everything." Needless
to say, pundits don't agree, with many
predicting poor results for a Democratic "team that refuses to take the field."

House and Senate Democrats 'Shelve' Tax Cuts Talking Points Memo reports
that "with House Democratic
leaders still insisting that they will follow the Senate's lead, it
seems more and more likely that they too will drop the tax cut issue
until after the election. Pelosi's effort to wrangle her caucus into
voting on middle-income tax cuts before the election appears not have
dislodged conservative and politically vulnerable Democrats who either
wanted to extend all the Bush tax cuts, including for high-income
earners, or to avoid any kind of risky vote s close to the elections."

Instead, They Decide on 'Political Suicide'writes
Jonathan Chait who's unimpressed by the Democrats "Curl Up In
A Fetal Position" strategy on taxes before the election. He explains:
"Moderate Democrats worry that passing a tax cut for income under
$250,000 would be portrayed as a tax hike, because it allows rates to
rise on income over $250,000. As I've noted several times, that could be
solved by holding a separate vote. But the moderate Democrats' solution
is not to hold a vote on any tax cuts. In other words, they're worried
that failing to vote on a tax cut for the rich will be portrayed as a
tax hike on the middle class. Answer: decide not to vote on a tax hike
for the middle class either."

Dems Don't Want to Do the 'Smart
Thing' which would be "to hold a vote on Obama's proposed middle-class
tax breaks -- before, you know, the election -- and dare Republicans to
reject it," insist
Steve Benen of The Washington Monthly. "Holding a vote gets everyone on
the record; allows Dems to boast of their votes on middle-class tax
cuts; and offers Dems a campaign cudgel to use against Republicans who
hold those cuts hostage."

'I'm Close to Thinking Let 'em lose, Serves 'em Right'argues
a frustrated Michael Tomasky at The Guardian, who predicts this result:
"Everyone watching this debate understands that a vote after the
elections is guaranteed to extend all the cuts and really embarrass
Obama, because he's going to be put in a position of vetoing cuts for
the middle class or signing a bill including all cuts, and he's
obviously going to have to do the latter. It's short-sighted. It's
selfish. It's weak. It's pathetic. And it's all too typical."

Might as Well Say 'Democrats Inch Closer to Lighting Themselves on Fire'opines
The Daily Kos's Jed Lewison. "If it's true, not only does it increase
the likelihood that Bush's tax cuts for the wealthy will forever be
joined at the hip with tax cuts for the middle-class (otherwise known as
the hostage bait), but it also will likely lead to bigger Democratic
losses this fall. After all, who in their right mind would want to cheer
for a team that refuses to take the field?"

There Still Is Time for a Votereports
Russell Berman at The Hill. "House aides emphasized that the situation
remains fluid. Any vote would most likely occur next week, which will
likely be the last week the House is in session before the election," he
writes. Speaker Nancy Pelosi has pushed for the House to act before the
midterms, but Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, "wants the House to wait for
the Senate to act first, according to Democratic aides."

What
Democrats May Do Instead Huffington Post reporter Ryan Grim, who called
the Democrats decision "foreseeable," details what the party will do
before the midterms: "Democrats, instead of focusing on tax cuts, said
the aides, will address legislation to limit corporate spending in the
election process, expand job creation and close loopholes for companies
that ship jobs offshore. "

This article is from the archive of our partner The Wire.

We want to hear what you think about this article. Submit a letter to the editor or write to letters@theatlantic.com.